capture-work-items

Capture requirements, bugs, or issues from free-form input into structured, persistent artifacts. Use when user wants to record a work item quickly without deep validation.

Safety Notice

This listing is imported from skills.sh public index metadata. Review upstream SKILL.md and repository scripts before running.

Copy this and send it to your AI assistant to learn

Install skill "capture-work-items" with this command: npx skills add nesnilnehc/ai-cortex/nesnilnehc-ai-cortex-capture-work-items

Skill: Capture Work Items

Purpose

Capture requirements, bugs, or issues from free-form input into structured, persistent artifacts. Provide quick structured recording without the deep validation that analyze-requirements performs. Align output paths with project documentation structure (e.g. project-documentation-template) and include status tracking for governance.


Core Objective

Primary Goal: Transform user-provided requirement, bug, or issue descriptions into structured work items with all required fields and persist them to the project-convention path.

Success Criteria (ALL must be met):

  1. Type identified: Work item classified as requirement, bug, or issue
  2. Required fields complete: All mandatory fields for the type are filled (no inference; ask user when missing)
  3. Status set: Initial status: captured in front-matter
  4. Path detected: Output path chosen per project doc structure (see Path Detection)
  5. Artifact persisted: Work item written to the selected path
  6. User confirmed: User explicitly confirmed or delegated write

Acceptance Test: Can someone or a downstream system read the artifact and understand the full work item and take action without asking clarifying questions?


Scope Boundaries

This skill handles:

  • Free-form input → Structured work item
  • Single or batch capture (batch: confirm per item or batch)
  • Output to local Markdown under project-convention path
  • Status lifecycle: initial captured only (downstream updates triaged, in-progress, done, blocked, cancelled)

This skill does NOT handle:

  • Deep requirements clarification or validation → Use analyze-requirements
  • Design or architecture → Use brainstorm-design
  • Direct API calls to Zentao/GitHub to create issues (extension point; not required for v1)

Handoff point: When artifact is persisted and user confirmed, hand off to analyze-requirements if item needs deeper validation, or to process-management/milestones for planning.


Use Cases

  • Quick backlog entry: User says "record this bug" or "add this requirement" — structure and persist without full analysis.
  • Meeting/email capture: Extract work items from meeting notes or email and save as structured artifacts.
  • Triage input: Capture items for later triage and prioritization in milestones or task breakdown.
  • Backlog evidence: Fill the Backlog gap identified in assess-doc-readiness (e.g. "Backlog: weak — no explicit backlog doc").

Behavior

Interaction Policy

  • Defaults: Path from project norms or spec/artifact-contract; type from input
  • Choice options: One missing-field question at a time; offer choices when applicable
  • Confirm: Target path when different from default; user confirms before write

Resolve Project Norms

Before persisting, resolve artifact norms per spec/artifact-norms-schema.md:

  1. Check for .ai-cortex/artifact-norms.yaml or docs/ARTIFACT_NORMS.md
  2. If found, parse path_pattern for backlog-item and use project rules
  3. If not found, use defaults from spec/artifact-contract.md

Path Detection

Choose output path using resolved norms (or contract default):

ConditionOutput path
docs/process-management/ existsdocs/process-management/project-board/backlog/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md
Otherwisedocs/backlog/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md

Create subdirectories if they do not exist. Use YYYY-MM-DD for today; <slug> is kebab-case from title.

Phase 0: Triage — Identify Type

Announce at start: "I'm using the capture-work-items skill to record this work item."

Classify input as:

  • requirement: New need, feature request, or enhancement
  • bug: Defect, incorrect behavior, failure to meet specification
  • issue: Task, improvement, or question (generic work item)

Phase 1: Extract — Identify Fields

Extract available fields from input. Required fields by type:

TypeRequired fields
requirementTitle, Problem/Need, Acceptance criteria
bugTitle, Description, Steps to reproduce, Expected vs Actual, Severity
issueTitle, Description, Type (task | improvement | question)

Phase 2: Prompt — Fill Missing Required Fields

For any missing required field, ask user one question at a time. Do not infer or guess.

Phase 3: Persist — Write Artifact

  1. Run Resolve Project Norms, then Path Detection (see above)
  2. Confirm target path with user if different from default
  3. Write Markdown with YAML front-matter using the appropriate template (see Output Templates)
  4. Set status: captured in front-matter

Phase 4: Confirm

Confirm with user that the artifact was written and is complete. Do not commit to version control unless user explicitly requests.


Input & Output

Input

  • Raw description of requirement, bug, or issue from user
  • Optional: project context (existing docs/ structure for path detection)

Output

Structured work item Markdown file with YAML front-matter. Templates follow.

Requirement Template

---
artifact_type: backlog-item
created_by: capture-work-items
lifecycle: living
type: requirement
date: YYYY-MM-DD
status: captured
source: [user|meeting|email]
trace_id: optional
---

# [Title]

## Problem / Need
[Who has what problem; no solution language]

## Acceptance Criteria
- [ ] [Criterion 1]
- [ ] [Criterion 2]

## Notes
[Optional]

Bug Template

---
artifact_type: backlog-item
created_by: capture-work-items
lifecycle: living
type: bug
date: YYYY-MM-DD
status: captured
severity: [critical|major|minor]
---

# [Title]

## Description
[What goes wrong]

## Steps to Reproduce
1. ...
2. ...

## Expected vs Actual
- **Expected**: ...
- **Actual**: ...

## Environment
[Optional]

Issue Template

---
artifact_type: backlog-item
created_by: capture-work-items
lifecycle: living
type: issue
subtype: [task|improvement|question]
date: YYYY-MM-DD
status: captured
---

# [Title]

## Description
[Content]

Status Lifecycle

The skill sets only status: captured. Downstream processes (milestones, promotion-iteration-tasks, run-checkpoint) may update to: triaged, in-progress, done, blocked, cancelled.


Restrictions

Hard Boundaries

  • No skipping required fields: If a required field cannot be inferred, ask the user. Do not leave blanks.
  • No analyze-requirements flow: Do not run diagnostic states (RA0–RA5). If input is very vague, suggest capture first then hand off to analyze-requirements.
  • Confirm path before write: Avoid overwriting existing files; confirm target path when ambiguous.
  • Path follows project structure: Use Path Detection rules; do not hard-code a single path.

Skill Boundaries (Avoid Overlap)

Do NOT do these (other skills handle them):

  • Deep requirements validation: Diagnostic states, problem articulation, scope bounding → Use analyze-requirements
  • Design and architecture: Solutions, alternatives, trade-offs → Use brainstorm-design
  • Task breakdown: Epic/task decomposition, acceptance criteria refinement → Use process-management or implementation planning

When to stop and hand off:

  • User says "this needs more analysis" → Hand off to analyze-requirements
  • User says "design this" → Hand off to brainstorm-design
  • Artifact persisted and confirmed → Hand off complete

Self-Check

Core Success Criteria (ALL must be met)

  • Type identified: Work item is requirement, bug, or issue
  • Required fields complete: All mandatory fields filled (no inference)
  • Status set: status: captured in front-matter
  • Path detected: Output path follows Path Detection rules
  • Artifact persisted: File written to selected path
  • User confirmed: User confirmed or delegated write

Process Quality Checks

  • One question at a time: Did not overwhelm user with multiple missing-field questions
  • No solution language in requirements: Problem/Need describes problem, not implementation
  • Path creation: Created backlog/ subdirectory if needed
  • Filename convention: Used YYYY-MM-DD-{slug}.md

Acceptance Test

Can someone or a downstream system read the artifact and understand the full work item and take action without asking clarifying questions?

If NO: Required fields are incomplete. Return to Prompt phase.

If YES: Capture complete. Hand off as needed.


Examples

Example 1: Bug Capture

User: "The login page shows 500 when I use special characters in the password field."

Agent announces: "I'm using the capture-work-items skill to record this work item."

Triage: Classified as bug.

Extract: Title and description present; Steps to reproduce, Expected vs Actual, Severity missing.

Prompt (one at a time):

Agent: "What are the exact steps to reproduce this?"

User: "1. Go to /login 2. Enter any username 3. Enter a password with @ or # 4. Click Login"

Agent: "What did you expect vs what actually happened?"

User: "Expected: normal login or validation error. Actual: 500 Internal Server Error."

Agent: "What severity would you assign: critical, major, or minor?"

User: "major."

Persist: Path detected — docs/process-management/ exists. Write to docs/process-management/project-board/backlog/2026-03-06-login-500-special-chars.md.

Confirm: "Written. Do you want to adjust anything or hand off to triage?"

Example 2: Requirement Capture — Vague Input

User: "We need better error messages."

Agent announces: "I'm using the capture-work-items skill to record this work item."

Triage: Classified as requirement (could be issue; agent chooses requirement as default for "need").

Extract: Title derivable ("Better error messages"); Problem/Need and Acceptance criteria missing.

Prompt:

Agent: "Who has this problem and what exactly is wrong with current error messages?"

User: "Our API users get generic 'Something went wrong' with no actionable info."

Agent: "What would 'done' look like — at least one concrete acceptance criterion?"

User: "Error responses should include a code (e.g. ERR_001) and a short human-readable message explaining what went wrong."

Persist: Path detected — docs/process-management/ does not exist. Write to docs/backlog/2026-03-06-better-error-messages.md.

Handoff suggestion: "This could benefit from deeper validation with analyze-requirements. Proceed with capture only, or hand off for full analysis?"

User: "Capture only for now."

Confirm: "Written. Hand off to triage when ready."

Example 3: Issue Capture — Edge Case (Multiple Items in One Message)

User: "Two things: 1) Update the README install section. 2) Add a CONTRIBUTING.md."

Agent announces: "I'm using the capture-work-items skill. I see two separate work items. I will capture them one at a time."

Item 1 — Type: issue (task). Title: "Update README install section". Description: from context. Persist as 2026-03-06-update-readme-install.md.

Item 2 — Type: issue (task). Title: "Add CONTRIBUTING.md". Description: from context. Persist as 2026-03-06-add-contributing.md.

Confirm: "Both items captured. Review and adjust if needed."


Appendix: Output contract

This skill produces a document-artifact (backlog-item). Each output file MUST conform to:

ElementRequirement
PathPer Path Detection: docs/process-management/project-board/backlog/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md or docs/backlog/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md
artifact_typebacklog-item
created_bycapture-work-items
lifecycleliving
typerequirement | bug | issue
statuscaptured
Required sectionsPer type: requirement (Title, Problem/Need, Acceptance criteria); bug (Title, Description, Steps to reproduce, Expected vs Actual, Severity); issue (Title, Description, subtype)

Source Transparency

This detail page is rendered from real SKILL.md content. Trust labels are metadata-based hints, not a safety guarantee.

Related Skills

Related by shared tags or category signals.

Automation

write-agents-entry

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

Diataxis Writing

Diataxis documentation framework practice guide. Provides diagnosis, classification, templates, and quality assessment for four documentation types (Tutorial...

Registry SourceRecently Updated
0250
Profile unavailable
Research

Faq Forge

Build, maintain, and publish professional FAQ documentation. Create, organize, and publish customer-facing knowledge bases. Reduce support burden by answerin...

Registry SourceRecently Updated
091
Profile unavailable